EASA threat to operation of N Reg Aircraft
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And, mj, let me add a last remark: even if you argue with the local requirements where you live in, this is not the complete picture! Behind all these license processes there is one standard: agreed in the Convention on International Civil Aviation, that the US and all EU countries signed. So you are arguing only the details, while the "path to aviation licenses" should more or less the same in 190 countries.
For me the only point could be, if flying on FAA IR in the EU would be somehow unsafe. Apparently and sadly enough it's the other way round:
Recently I read an accident report about a German Cirrus SR22 from February 2009, in which 4 people died. The pilot had around 220 hours (enough for the IR), but he didn't do the IR (like nearly all (>95%) private pilots in Germany). As we all know the SR22 is a great plane for instrument flying, and the pilot was known to be very passional regarding aviation. Although I don't know this case, I assume, this 50 year old pilot would have loved to get the instrument rating, if this would have been compatible to his job as a farmer and to his family life.
The airplane crashed in an area where reported weather was 400ft OVC.
The IR would have been at least another chance for these 4 guys.
And this is, what makes me angry, mj: while telling us we should adapt to this local enormous bureaucratic bull****, pilots and their families die - simply because they CAN'T do it and hope it will have a good outcome.
I agree, this is important. But I guess you don't want to say that flying with a FAA license is somehow unsafer as it is with an EU license?
And I have no clue how the IR is handled in the UK. I can tell you in Germany it's a nightmare - I tried it, really!, and gave up after 6 months spending weekend over weekend learning irrelevant details. Then I went to the US, after 5 weeks I came back with the IR, since them (2003) I am flying IFR in Europe.
In my IR checkride I had to demonstrate straight and level flight, turns and a (simulated) approach ONLY on compass and altimeter. That's strange because the compass turns the "wrong" way. So you don't want to tell it's unsafe to fly on an FAA license, I guess 
For me the only point could be, if flying on FAA IR in the EU would be somehow unsafe. Apparently and sadly enough it's the other way round:
Recently I read an accident report about a German Cirrus SR22 from February 2009, in which 4 people died. The pilot had around 220 hours (enough for the IR), but he didn't do the IR (like nearly all (>95%) private pilots in Germany). As we all know the SR22 is a great plane for instrument flying, and the pilot was known to be very passional regarding aviation. Although I don't know this case, I assume, this 50 year old pilot would have loved to get the instrument rating, if this would have been compatible to his job as a farmer and to his family life.
The airplane crashed in an area where reported weather was 400ft OVC.
The IR would have been at least another chance for these 4 guys.
And this is, what makes me angry, mj: while telling us we should adapt to this local enormous bureaucratic bull****, pilots and their families die - simply because they CAN'T do it and hope it will have a good outcome.
it has met the EU safety regulations
And I have no clue how the IR is handled in the UK. I can tell you in Germany it's a nightmare - I tried it, really!, and gave up after 6 months spending weekend over weekend learning irrelevant details. Then I went to the US, after 5 weeks I came back with the IR, since them (2003) I am flying IFR in Europe.
I have never done partial panel approaches
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes yes but you live in Europe you can't just opt out of local laws
Being a german I would have thought you would have been more rules and regulations than a Capitalist pig Island monkey.
While in Germany I got warned for working outside of maximum working time and fishing without a License. Could I use the excuse that those regulations were a pile of crap and as I was working for a brit company I had signed a form that meant I could work as many hours as I liked?. And fishing my Grandad had fished exactly the same lake 70 years ago without a license. Anyway what do you mean my gear is not legal cause it doesn't have a TUV mark on it and it doesn't comply with Bundersdsgfruhruvhsdfrigriu regulation.
Yes Instrument skills are important, which is why I am supporting the calls for the UK IMC to be retained. I proberly over train my PPL's in instrument skills. Yes something needs done about it. It still doesn't mean you can opt out of the rules and regs that everyone else does just because you don't like them.
Instead of flighting for the continuation of a loophole, fight for a EU IMC rating.
Being a german I would have thought you would have been more rules and regulations than a Capitalist pig Island monkey.
While in Germany I got warned for working outside of maximum working time and fishing without a License. Could I use the excuse that those regulations were a pile of crap and as I was working for a brit company I had signed a form that meant I could work as many hours as I liked?. And fishing my Grandad had fished exactly the same lake 70 years ago without a license. Anyway what do you mean my gear is not legal cause it doesn't have a TUV mark on it and it doesn't comply with Bundersdsgfruhruvhsdfrigriu regulation.
Yes Instrument skills are important, which is why I am supporting the calls for the UK IMC to be retained. I proberly over train my PPL's in instrument skills. Yes something needs done about it. It still doesn't mean you can opt out of the rules and regs that everyone else does just because you don't like them.
Instead of flighting for the continuation of a loophole, fight for a EU IMC rating.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree with you Thore. Safety is everything.
A little word MJ about the exams that we apparantly can't be arsed to take.
I don't wish to take the exams because the legality of this is that I DON'T need a JAA licence to fly an Aircraft with a large "N" on the tail.
The study anyway for the 14 cr*p exams under JAA takes a lot longer than you state. As I don't work in Ops, your job comparison is lost on me.
As for Japan, well so what. You would be flying a Jap reg aircraft. You wouldn't have to go through all of that in Japan to fly an "N" reg or any other non Jap reg based there.
Anyway, most countries offer just a validation so that you can fly for say a carrier like Emirates or Etihad etc.
A validation would work equally as well here, as opposed to the rubbish being proposed.
Also, I have never been a fan of LPC's. My own believe is that an LPC is not a proficient enough check. Get them in the sim I say. Oh, many can't though due to cost under JAA.
A little word MJ about the exams that we apparantly can't be arsed to take.
I don't wish to take the exams because the legality of this is that I DON'T need a JAA licence to fly an Aircraft with a large "N" on the tail.
The study anyway for the 14 cr*p exams under JAA takes a lot longer than you state. As I don't work in Ops, your job comparison is lost on me.
As for Japan, well so what. You would be flying a Jap reg aircraft. You wouldn't have to go through all of that in Japan to fly an "N" reg or any other non Jap reg based there.
Anyway, most countries offer just a validation so that you can fly for say a carrier like Emirates or Etihad etc.
A validation would work equally as well here, as opposed to the rubbish being proposed.
Also, I have never been a fan of LPC's. My own believe is that an LPC is not a proficient enough check. Get them in the sim I say. Oh, many can't though due to cost under JAA.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have never said that flying on a FAA license or rating of any form is unsafe.
Again we come back to.
And time and time again you always come back to the first issue.
Again we come back to.
As far as I can see there is 2 seperate issues here.
1. Pilot quals and what you really need to fly in clouds
2. Foreign reg assets being based in the EU to circumvent the local laws.
1. Pilot quals and what you really need to fly in clouds
2. Foreign reg assets being based in the EU to circumvent the local laws.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes yes but you live in Europe you can't just opt out of local laws
- Volkswagen is producing everywhere in the world, f.e in the Czech Republic, where they don't know working hour limits (or China). They are opting out.
- If in our company we have too much to do, I call India. Opting out.
- When I want to go boating and fishing, I can do this easily in the Bahamas, where you don't need any license and additionally the weather is nice. I am opting out
- You buy your DVD player from a company that never heard the word "union" and "environment protection" - you are opting out.
- Chinese people sell their crap DVD players to Europe, because they can't use them all themselves, they are opting out.
Everybody is opting out. This world is a small world and everybody goes where he thinks it's better. Protectionism just means you don't have the best rules but somehow feel you want to keep them nevertheless.
fight for a EU IMC rating.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway, most countries offer just a validation so that you can fly for say a carrier like Emirates or Etihad etc.
You used to be able to get a 6 month validation when you got a work permit and had done a test with a GCAA approved TRE. They have now stopped this now because of companys and pilots taking the piss. And if your aircraft gets based in Sharjah guess what it has to go on the A6 reg pretty damn quick. So much so the local Biz jets on foriegn regs have to do empty Sectors to Bahrain and Quatar depending where they can get parking to get them out of the UAE so they don't have to go onto the A6 reg. If you start listing aircraft you know that don't do this they will without a doudt be owned by one of the Royals who are outside the system.
I have sat/studied the JAR while doing a full time job and it was the first time I had seen 40% of the subject matter. It took me a month per 7 exams. With your aviation experence it won't take half that time. Added in the BGS online question DB. Its easier now than when I sat them in the first years of JAR when all the questions were translated into english from the state of writing and we had very little feed back questions and they were bring new questions out monthly.
Nobody is disputing you don't need them to fly a N reg. Its just that your N reg won't be based in Europe any more. Same with any country other than Europe you base an aircraft there you either go local or you get it the hell outa there before its impounded.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its just that your N reg won't be based in Europe any more.
I am not the operator, and the operator is outside the EU, so this aircraft doesn't apply to the new European rules, my FAA IR stays valid. No?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MJ
You reckon so? I could tell you a few things which will open your eyes. The CE mark is basically a load of bollox.
Interestingly, under the EASA proposals, your old FAA TR will be usable with the EASA CPL/IR.
Flying an N-reg, you are not opting out of local laws 
The UK is a signatory to ICAO, and the Part 91 maintenance on the privately owned N-reg complies with ICAO. The N-reg thus complies with UK law (the ANO, which is aligned with ICAO, except for differences filed)
It's called aviation.
The UK CAA have the power to ground your N-reg if it is unsafe. They have the power to prosecute you (and are obliged to do so under ICAO) if you fly without a license or a medical.
I don't see where UK or EU laws are being flouted.
This is just an alternate maintenance / paperwork regime, which (it has been proven) is just as safe. So your example of dodgy CD players is completely meaningless.
That's bollox too. There is no such proposal. The proposals, for jets, are EASA 145 maintenance oversight, and for all aircraft, EASA licenses/ratings (but not EASA type ratings).
In the UK I can't buy a Chinese CD which is not EU'd and have the mark that says it has met the EU safety regulations if i could tranding standards would shut the shop and the CD players taken and destroyed.
Or you can do a JAR TR if your going onto a new type.
but you live in Europe you can't just opt out of local laws
The UK is a signatory to ICAO, and the Part 91 maintenance on the privately owned N-reg complies with ICAO. The N-reg thus complies with UK law (the ANO, which is aligned with ICAO, except for differences filed)
It's called aviation.
The UK CAA have the power to ground your N-reg if it is unsafe. They have the power to prosecute you (and are obliged to do so under ICAO) if you fly without a license or a medical.
I don't see where UK or EU laws are being flouted.
This is just an alternate maintenance / paperwork regime, which (it has been proven) is just as safe. So your example of dodgy CD players is completely meaningless.
Its just that your N reg won't be based in Europe any more
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You opt out by leaving your country. No one will have a problem with you flying and basing your N reg in the Bahamas,India,China,Czech Republic. But I think after a few months they will want you on there reg with there Licenses.
Not really in the UK because we have had the IMC for ages.
But you keep coming back to
When the reason why the changes are being made is.
.
You can play the safety card all you like but the second reason is an unacceptable piss take which the loophole allowing it is being closed.
Here I am with you. And as long as we don't have it: wouldn't you agree that the FAA IR is one of the most successful things in safety the EU airspace has to offer for private pilots?
But you keep coming back to
1. Pilot quals and what you really need to fly in clouds
2. Foreign reg assets being based in the EU to circumvent the local laws
You can play the safety card all you like but the second reason is an unacceptable piss take which the loophole allowing it is being closed.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO the issue is where the aircraft is based.
The TR always was transfered if you had 500 hours on type.
And I agree CE is bolloxs but it at least means kids toys with lead paint on them and bits that comes off can't be sold.
The ICAO rules still work, all it means is after the changes the system will work as in the rest of the world. ie you fly in and out and stay a bit in a Foriegn country then if you stay for a long period you have a choice of going local or getting out of the country.
If the regulators are happy you staying on N reg with dual oversight and dual licensing thats fine by me. If the regulators wish to relax the manditory conversions to local reg thats up to them.
The TR always was transfered if you had 500 hours on type.
And I agree CE is bolloxs but it at least means kids toys with lead paint on them and bits that comes off can't be sold.
The ICAO rules still work, all it means is after the changes the system will work as in the rest of the world. ie you fly in and out and stay a bit in a Foriegn country then if you stay for a long period you have a choice of going local or getting out of the country.
If the regulators are happy you staying on N reg with dual oversight and dual licensing thats fine by me. If the regulators wish to relax the manditory conversions to local reg thats up to them.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It took me a month per 7 exams
I don't get and understand you, mj, only one explanation: you think you gonna benefit moneywise from this EU decision.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That wasn't 7 months full time.. I was doing 12 hour shifts.
It was 1 month at weekends and evenings and that was for 7 of the exams. Not each. Go and have a look at the content its barely 16 year school level. There is volume I will admit. But the actual content isn't menatally challanging
And the fact I have stated I have a GCAA ATPL license would seem to suggest I am going to get zero benefit out of these changes.
It was 1 month at weekends and evenings and that was for 7 of the exams. Not each. Go and have a look at the content its barely 16 year school level. There is volume I will admit. But the actual content isn't menatally challanging
And the fact I have stated I have a GCAA ATPL license would seem to suggest I am going to get zero benefit out of these changes.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
German "Pilot and Aircraft" newspaper just writes (I just used the google translator, sorry, but I hope it's understandable enough - or at least better than my english
The interesting question is: Why?
Neither the authority nor the Commission Cologne
ever even claimed by the N-registered
Aircraft,
the so-called "Third Country Aircraft"
would also show the least security risk.
Rather, the motives of a political nature. In the
Desperate to aviation trade war with the
U.S. fight back somehow outdated, the Commission
against its own citizens who are registered N-
Aircraft operate. It sounds crazy - and that is
also crazy. Opinions
and documents from the
Commission's work, the pilot and aircraft are present,
Proving that no democratic legitimacy of European
Legislation apparently the machine's
Pilots and their personal and private life as
a pawn in a dispute with the U.S. viewing.
Hey, mj, give up. They are not interested in ruling EU based aircraft (they probably know and accept the FAA IR is good for GA in Europe), they just found out they could hurt the US somehow by hurting N-Reg operated airplanes in Europe. That seems to be the only ambition these people got in mind. Remember this fueling aircraft struggle between Airbus and Boeing? Looks like things like that are the most important items in this issue...
The interesting question is: Why?
Neither the authority nor the Commission Cologne
ever even claimed by the N-registered
Aircraft,
the so-called "Third Country Aircraft"
would also show the least security risk.
Rather, the motives of a political nature. In the
Desperate to aviation trade war with the
U.S. fight back somehow outdated, the Commission
against its own citizens who are registered N-
Aircraft operate. It sounds crazy - and that is
also crazy. Opinions
and documents from the
Commission's work, the pilot and aircraft are present,
Proving that no democratic legitimacy of European
Legislation apparently the machine's
Pilots and their personal and private life as
a pawn in a dispute with the U.S. viewing.
Hey, mj, give up. They are not interested in ruling EU based aircraft (they probably know and accept the FAA IR is good for GA in Europe), they just found out they could hurt the US somehow by hurting N-Reg operated airplanes in Europe. That seems to be the only ambition these people got in mind. Remember this fueling aircraft struggle between Airbus and Boeing? Looks like things like that are the most important items in this issue...
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mate your english is a damn sight better than my Scheiße Deutsch.
And I might as well give up I don't think either side of this debate on here will actually be able to effect anything to do with either the regulations or the process. And neither side is going to change thier mind anyway.
The EU N reg operators will scream you have worked against safety and will be given a stiff ignoring, whats a couple of thousand votes spread across the whole of the EU. The JAR lic PPL really won't care. The Pro pilots will either not care or be quite happy the percieved advantage the N reg operators will have been removed.The general public won't give 2 hoots or will think what the hell were US planes based here for anyway.
I can't see the US even caring if the EU resident pilots get shafted so they won't cut a deal on other items. There "heavy" traffic will continue to operate as before and the East coast guys can still pop over and play golf when they feel like it.
And even if they do retain it, some where down the line eurocontrol will claim lack of resources and sector overload and remove the wavier on airways charges for lights. Which for a 5750kg machine is about £45 for a 120NM sector last time I got to see a bill but I am sure IO has got the current charges.
Personally I am just going to put my efforts into getting a EU IMC which is where the real safety benefits are to be reaped to the majority of European aviators.
And I might as well give up I don't think either side of this debate on here will actually be able to effect anything to do with either the regulations or the process. And neither side is going to change thier mind anyway.
The EU N reg operators will scream you have worked against safety and will be given a stiff ignoring, whats a couple of thousand votes spread across the whole of the EU. The JAR lic PPL really won't care. The Pro pilots will either not care or be quite happy the percieved advantage the N reg operators will have been removed.The general public won't give 2 hoots or will think what the hell were US planes based here for anyway.
I can't see the US even caring if the EU resident pilots get shafted so they won't cut a deal on other items. There "heavy" traffic will continue to operate as before and the East coast guys can still pop over and play golf when they feel like it.
And even if they do retain it, some where down the line eurocontrol will claim lack of resources and sector overload and remove the wavier on airways charges for lights. Which for a 5750kg machine is about £45 for a 120NM sector last time I got to see a bill but I am sure IO has got the current charges.
Personally I am just going to put my efforts into getting a EU IMC which is where the real safety benefits are to be reaped to the majority of European aviators.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thore - a very good German magazine article, in English, is here
MJ - your prejudices get in the way of understanding the real issues. If you know how I can operate my N-reg cheaper, I am all ears...
MJ - your prejudices get in the way of understanding the real issues. If you know how I can operate my N-reg cheaper, I am all ears...
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: in a hotel
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The JCAB doesn't look too bad. You only have to do Air Law differences and the JCAB Radio Licence. You're 6 months timeframe is inclusive of the full type rating ground school for the Aircraft you fly in Japan. I would imagine without it then it would be a lot less than 6 months just to pass those 2 exams.
If it was just a case of an Air Law differences exam, and a bit of time in the sim to satisfy JAA then it would be a walk in the park. Sadly, it isn't and this whole process is a lot longer, costlier and time consuming than the JCAB example you give. It also means zero to me as I don't legally require JAA licences to fly an American reg jet. It's a totally different situation for example than working in Japan and flying a Japan reg jet.
I haven't looked at your other example in depth but I do know that it is easy and straightforward to obtain a GCAA ATPL.
Don't worry about us getting impounded, not going to happen.
And just another thought for you MJ. I don't know what type of flying you are currently involved in, but why not give "N" reg a try.
You'll have the added benefit of better trained crew who get proper recurrent training, rather than the naff LPC that my granny could pass.
If you want any pointers, then I'm sure any of us who fly "N" reg can help you. Your boss may like the idea, are you Aberdeen based ?
If it was just a case of an Air Law differences exam, and a bit of time in the sim to satisfy JAA then it would be a walk in the park. Sadly, it isn't and this whole process is a lot longer, costlier and time consuming than the JCAB example you give. It also means zero to me as I don't legally require JAA licences to fly an American reg jet. It's a totally different situation for example than working in Japan and flying a Japan reg jet.
I haven't looked at your other example in depth but I do know that it is easy and straightforward to obtain a GCAA ATPL.
Don't worry about us getting impounded, not going to happen.
And just another thought for you MJ. I don't know what type of flying you are currently involved in, but why not give "N" reg a try.
You'll have the added benefit of better trained crew who get proper recurrent training, rather than the naff LPC that my granny could pass.
If you want any pointers, then I'm sure any of us who fly "N" reg can help you. Your boss may like the idea, are you Aberdeen based ?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ATPL to ATP is exactly the same as ATP to ATPL as far as I can see.
We both have to do the theory exams.
We both have to get a medical.
We both have to sit a flight test.
Or have I got it wrong?
Please explain what the process is for you to convert your ATP and type rating to a JAA one.
GCAA in the last 4 months has tightened up. No more validations. CAR-OPS is based on JAR-OPS and the local cadets sit the JAR theory exams.
And there is a difference they are crying out for pilots and there isn't enough locals. If they had the same situation as say India or Europe with a glut of locals wanting jobs they would shut the market completely and get rid of the expats.
And added to say no thanks don't need it. I have never had an issue converting my JAR license to a local one. As far as I can see I would gain no advantage from holding one apart from if an employer wanted me to do a FAA type rating and it made life easier to transfer the type onto a local license. But alot now say FAA type ratings arn't accepted zero hours where as JAR ones are.
And no I am based somewhere thats not as cold and miserable as ABZ.
We both have to do the theory exams.
We both have to get a medical.
We both have to sit a flight test.
Or have I got it wrong?
Please explain what the process is for you to convert your ATP and type rating to a JAA one.
GCAA in the last 4 months has tightened up. No more validations. CAR-OPS is based on JAR-OPS and the local cadets sit the JAR theory exams.
And there is a difference they are crying out for pilots and there isn't enough locals. If they had the same situation as say India or Europe with a glut of locals wanting jobs they would shut the market completely and get rid of the expats.
And added to say no thanks don't need it. I have never had an issue converting my JAR license to a local one. As far as I can see I would gain no advantage from holding one apart from if an employer wanted me to do a FAA type rating and it made life easier to transfer the type onto a local license. But alot now say FAA type ratings arn't accepted zero hours where as JAR ones are.
And no I am based somewhere thats not as cold and miserable as ABZ.
Last edited by mad_jock; 30th Oct 2010 at 17:01.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can do it a couple of ways either flick you keyboard into german mode and remember were it was.
or press Alt and type 225 on the num pad. It needs to be on a numeric pad it won't work on a laptop keyboard unless you can kick it into that mode.
the other handy ones are Alt 253 for a ½
Alt 254 for a ¼
Alt 167 for º
Alt 145 for æ
Alt 241 for ±
These work in New times roman font you will have to check your mappings if you use another font.
or press Alt and type 225 on the num pad. It needs to be on a numeric pad it won't work on a laptop keyboard unless you can kick it into that mode.
the other handy ones are Alt 253 for a ½
Alt 254 for a ¼
Alt 167 for º
Alt 145 for æ
Alt 241 for ±
These work in New times roman font you will have to check your mappings if you use another font.